Download P.048-2011 Amd.(26) [Ferguson- climate change]

STATES OF JERSEY
r
ISLAND PLAN 2011: APPROVAL
(P.48/2011): TWENTY-SIXTH
AMENDMENT
Lodged au Greffe on 26th April 2011
by Senator S.C. Ferguson
STATES GREFFE
2011
Price code: B
P.48 Amd.(26)
ISLAND PLAN 2011: APPROVAL (P.48/2011): TWENTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT
PAGE 2 –
After the words “the revised draft Island Plan 2011” insert the words “except that the
draft Plan be amended as set out in Appendix 2 to remove all references to climate
change and carbon emissions”.
SENATOR S.C. FERGUSON
Page - 2
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
REPORT
This Island Plan is intended to last for 10 years. If this is the case it is less than
sensible to include pseudo-scientific dogma which is already out of date.
The question of the inclusion of references to the IPCC AR4 from 2007 was raised
with the Inspector. His conclusion was that it was better to leave these references in on
the basis of the precautionary principle. It could be that he considered this area to be
beyond his area of competence. On the other hand the precautionary principle is best
applied to risks which are, to a greater or lesser degree, realistic. For example it might
be necessary to consider the possibility of fog delaying a flight. The precautionary
principle dictates either insuring against such a happening or travelling the night
before or a combination of the two. The precautionary principle does not require a
country to mortgage its future in case an infinitely low-probability event might occur.
We, as politicians must consider all factors when debating such matters. Currently
many UK politicians are blindly following the raucous voices of the IPCC and their
acolytes, without considering the collateral damage the policies advocated will cause.
Is it reasonable that we should deny the poorer countries of the world access to cheap
energy and thereby the means to drag themselves out of poverty and into a prosperous
future? Should we be condemning futures generations – particularly women – to
cooking using wood and animal dung in cramped unsanitary conditions with all the
health hazards this entails?
Willie Soon, a Harvard Astrophysicist makes the following comment –
‘Those who must rely on human and animal muscle, or open fires, remain
poor. Certainly, wind turbines and solar panels are far better than primitive
energy. They can bless remote villages with electricity. But they are nothing
compared to reliable electricity from hydrocarbon, hydroelectric and nuclear
power.’
If we follow the policies advocated by the IPCC, we will be substantially increasing
the cost of living as well as reducing the standard of living. Given that we live on an
Island which is in itself more expensive and given that the evidence is that the IPCC
policies are flawed and based on flawed science, I would maintain that it would
behove us to address ourselves to mitigation rather than prevention.
The current policy of encouraging energy-efficient houses is entirely appropriate and
is a good example of mitigation, particularly as we do not actually know what the
long-term trends in temperature are. There are 2 bodies of opinion at the moment. The
first considers that temperatures will rise, and the second that temperatures will fall to
those of the period 1940 to 1970. Energy efficiency and insulation are good in either
circumstance.
The Draft Island Plan, as can be seen in the list included with this report, makes great
play of climate change which, reliant as this is on the IPCC report, can be translated as
Anthropogenic Global Warming. There is also an emphasis on low carbon which is
shorthand for carbon dioxide emissions. This is compounded by warnings of increased
storms and rising sea levels.
Page - 3
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
Some of the empirical evidence contradicting the computer model estimates is
attached in the Appendix.
The dire warnings and the recommended IPCC policies are mooted as requiring the
West to “deindustrialise”, to reduce our standard of living and to adopt sustainable life
styles. This is usually equated with no long-distance travel and a lifestyle equivalent to
that of the Victorian era, if not earlier than that. The rationale for that is that fossil
fuels are bad for the planet and by doing this we will prevent AGW and save the
planet.
Civilisation has progressed as a result of changes to more efficient forms of energy as
knowledge increases – from wood to coal to oil. Despite the fears of running out of
oil, this seems unlikely with the significant availability of new offshore reserves and
shale oil. This will be more expensive to extract and so energy efficiency will be
essential – not because of carbon dioxide emissions but because of the extraction
expense. In fact, the next major change in energy utilisation will be to gas, of which
there is some 250 years’ supply.
It may be that, at some time in the future, wind power may be viable. From a practical
viewpoint, it is currently too intermittent and inefficient and cannot be stored. This is
demonstrated by the fact that during the extremely cold period last December, wind
produced some 0.4% of the power usage in the UK1. The only reason that wind power
is being built in the UK is that there are large EU subsidies to producers, which are
paid for by a levy on conventional power producers who then pass it on as a charge to
their customers. According to Christopher Booker2, by 2020 wind power will add
some £400 a year to energy costs per household in the UK. If the full renewables
charges are added up, this amounts to £880 a year per household. It is therefore
appropriate to delete the paragraphs on wind power and substitute the suggested
paragraph.
There is considerable doom and gloom about an environmental crisis prophesied by
the main stream media and some scientists. It is said that resources are finite, there is
too large a world population and so forth. This is not supported by the facts. Julian
Simon3 researched the facts. For example, as populations become more prosperous,
the birth-rate falls. Human intellect invents new methods of utilising resources which
are more efficient and use less of any resource. As an example, when silicon chips
were invented they required a thick slice of silicon. Nowadays they use wafer-thin
slices. A block of silicon will produce significantly more slices than that originally
used. Cars have better mileage per gallon than they did in the 1930s.
If we retain the various “climate change” and “low carbon” references in the Island
Plan, we are effectively saying that we are willing not only to reduce our own standard
of living but also to prevent poorer countries from obtaining access to reasonably
priced energy. We are content to see them continue in a way of life that contributes to
a low life expectancy, overcrowding and poor health.
1
Neta (the New Electricity Trading Arrangements) report on the Balancing Mechanism
Reporting System www.bmreprts.com
2
Sunday Telegraph 16th October 2010
3
Julian Simon, the Ultimate Resource 2
Page - 4
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
To quote Dr. Roy Spencer:
Making our most abundant and affordable sources of energy artificially more
expensive with laws and regulations will end up killing millions of people. …
Poverty kills. Those who argue otherwise from their positions of fossil-fuelled
health and wealth are like spoiled children.
And to prove that nothing is new under the sun:
A change in our climate is taking place very surely. Both heat and cold are
becoming moderate within the memory of even the middle-aged, and snows
are less frequent and less deep.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1804.
Financial and manpower implications
There are no additional financial or manpower implications for the States arising from
this amendment.
Page - 5
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
APPENDIX 1
1.
This graph illustrate the changes in carbon dioxide and temperature against
time. As can be seen, the temperature is falling even though the carbon
dioxide level is rising. The satellite temperature readings are more reliable
than the Hadley surface temperature readings. (Joseph D’Aleo, CCM)
2.
According to the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
USA) graph for sea level at Brest, Brittany, the maximum rate of rise of sea
level is 1.08 mm a year. There have been various estimates of future sea levels
by the IPCC, one of which is a 1 metre rise by 2100. On the basis of 1.08 mm
a year, it will take 925 years to rise 1 metre. Given that there is apparently no
significant change in the level of ice in the Arctic and Antarctic, this will take
rather longer than the life of this Island Plan.
Page - 6
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
APPENDIX 2
Page
Paragraph/
Policy
Amendment to be made
30
2.2
Delete the words ‘and carbon neutral’
30 – 31
2.7 – 2.9
Delete paragraphs 2.7 to 2.9
31
2.11
For the words ‘and reducing, and adapting to, the impacts of
climate change have’ substitute the word ‘has’
31
2.12
Delete the words ‘with likely increased vulnerability to the
effects of climate change’
31 – 32
2.14
In the first bullet point delete the words ‘whilst seeking to
minimising vulnerability to the effects of climate change’
In the third bullet point for the words ‘renewable and low
carbon’ substitute the word ‘efficient’
38
2.36
For the words ‘renewable or low carbon’ substitute the word
‘efficient’
38
2.38
Delete the words ‘, and in response to the challenge of
climate change’
Delete the words ‘a reduction in emissions and the
development and use of decentralised and renewable or low
carbon energy’
39
Policy SP2
In 1, for the words ’to limit carbon emissions’ substitute the
words for energy efficiency’
In 2. for the words ‘renewable or low carbon’ substitute the
word ‘efficient’
Delete paragraph 3 of the Policy
75
2.18
In the third bullet point delete the words ‘relative to
considerations of climate change and raised sea levels’
76
2.19
Delete paragraph 2.19
270
7.3
Delete the words ‘and help combat the effects of climate
change’
345
Indicators
NR1
Delete Indicator 3
Page - 7
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
Page
Paragraph/
Policy
Amendment to be made
350
9.21
Delete the words ‘(i.e. greenhouse gas emissions contribute
to climate change)’
355 – 356
9.39
In the first bullet point delete the words ‘and carbon dioxide
emissions’ and the words ‘and help to deliver targets for
reducing carbon emissions’
In the second bullet point delete the words ‘and carbon
dioxide emissions’
In the fourth bullet point for the words ‘carbon dioxide
emissions can be reduced and overall security of supply
increased’ substitute the words ‘overall security of supply
can be increased’
In the fifth bullet point for the words ‘The Island has good
on and off-shore wind energy and within its territorial
waters’ substitute the words ‘Within the Island’s territorial
waters’
357
9.40
Delete paragraph 9.40
358
9.46
For paragraph 9.46 substitute the following paragraph –
‘9.46 At the moment wind generation is intermittent and
inefficient as well as being uneconomic without significant
government grants. The Department will reserve its
judgement on such projects until the economic and
environmental case is fully proven.’
361
9.50
For paragraph 9.50 substitute the following paragraph –
‘9.50 As stated, at the moment wind generation is
intermittent and inefficient as well as being uneconomic
without significant government grants. The Department will
reserve its judgement on such projects until the economic
and environmental case is fully proven.’
361
9.51
Delete paragraph 9.51
363
9.56
Delete the words ‘and the energy burnt in heating systems is
responsible for a major part of the Island’s carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions’
363
9.57
Delete the words ‘, and in response to the challenge of
climate change and the goals of the emerging Energy
Policy,’
Page - 8
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)
Page
Paragraph/
Policy
Amendment to be made
363
9.58
Delete the words ‘and to make good use of opportunities for
decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy.’
363
9.59 – 9.60
Delete paragraphs 9.59 and 9.60
364
9.61
Delete the words ‘, reducing CO2 emissions’
Delete the words ‘…(i.e. to reduce the extent and cost of
renewable technology required to meet the 10% CO2
emissions target)’
364
9.62
For the words ‘renewable and low carbon energy’ substitute
the word ‘new’
364
9.63
Delete the words ‘and carbon emissions’
Delete the words ‘low carbon and’
364
Policy NR7
Delete the words ‘low carbon or’ on both occasions where
they appear
Delete the words ‘to offset carbon emissions by at least
10%’
381
10.21
In the second bullet point delete the words ‘(including
energy use and carbon emissions)’
423
11.52
Delete the words ‘and carbon emitted’
Page - 9
P.48/2011 Amd.(26)